Hi Carsten: My main issue with ND 15 has to do with the role of the 'L'=='on-link' flag.
1) The text seems to indicate that the 'L' it determines whether classical ND or ND registration per this draft should be used " When a host has configured a non-link-local IPv6 address, it registers that address with one or more of its default routers using the Address Registration option (ARO) in an NS message. " I think that the 'L' bit can be reset in environments where ARO is not wanted. Further, I think that registration is useful in many environments, even Ethernet, where you do want to set the 'L' bit. As a consequence, I think 6LowPAN ND should define a new PIO 'W' bit to indicate whether ARO should be used or not, regardless of whether a node may look up another node on-link or not. 2) The text also indicates that if there are PIOs with and without 'L' set, then reset wins. That's an interesting rule but then, what if the PIO with 'L' set is received before the L reset? And BTW how does a host erroneously receive something? Like the postman was too busy? " Should the host erroneously receive a Prefix Information option with the 'L' (on-link) flag set, then that Prefix Information Option (PIO) MUST be ignored. " I think that the text should stay away from L bit. If a new 'W' bit is defined, then I suggest that as soon as the node receives a PIO with the 'W' but then it MUST register all its addresses that are based on that prefix. Note on the side that RPL extends the meaning of 'L' bit when used router to router in RPL's PIO, and that it is valid to set the 'L' bit there. Pascal http://www.xtranormal.com/watch/7011357/ > -----Original Message----- > From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] On > Behalf Of Carsten Bormann > Sent: Thursday, February 17, 2011 4:58 PM > To: 6lowpan > Subject: [6lowpan] Working Group Last call for draft-ietf-6lowpan-nd-15 > > In September/October, we had the first WGLC on 6LoWPAN-ND, which > resulted in a number of detailed comments and two resulting fine-tuning > iterations of the draft. > > draft-ietf-6lowpan-nd-15.txt has been out for two months now. > I understand it has taken part in several interops with multiple > implementations in this period; no issues came up. > > We now start the Working Group Last Call on: > > http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-6lowpan-nd-15 > > The document is planned to be submitted by this Working Group to the IESG > for publication as a Standards-Track Document. > > This is a two-week Working-Group Last-Call, ending on Thursday, > 2011-03-03 at 2359 UTC. > > Please review the changes to the document carefully once more, and send > your comments to the 6lowpan list. Please also do indicate to the list if you > are all-OK with the document. > > Gruesse, Carsten > > _______________________________________________ > 6lowpan mailing list > [email protected] > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/6lowpan _______________________________________________ 6lowpan mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/6lowpan
